Second

Don't worry i didn't even notice that atni-anti before you said so If it gives you any comfort

So should soldier carry only one??? Yeah. Realism... How come you can load/retry the game if you die? This game isn't even near to realism... Some little weapon config doesn't matter, when looking at those big holes in realism which makes game only a game. It is just so strange that some minor unrealism in weapon configs has so big impact to overall realism.

With RPG-7 there's no problem carrying that much. Soldier should improvise how he carries them. Afgans tied them to rope... (If we take a realism-view) If we take a gameplay-view, i have to say that i'm happy. I hated OFPs standart squads where only one guy carries 3 rockets!!! Or only one heavy rocket!!! RPGs should take only one slot... And ArmA would get atleast one happy NorthSaharani AT-grunt (me)

That's true... expacely AI gets big amout of boost because there's lots of cover for it as AI has tendensy to go prone and AI also seems to focus on land's shape and cover it provides (i'm only quessing). Firefights are more thrilling with broken/rough line-of-sight. Player has possibility to analyze more carefully how he should advance, rush or crawl. Right now i have terrain detail it in normal (no wonder OFP felt so lame again )

That is strange (entertable buildings). In orginal CWC there was lots of enterable buildings. Resistance had much less of those. And in ArmA even less... This is why Libany (capitol) in Nogova sucked and Petrovice was bit better, but those ugly cementblockbuildings weren't as good as Everon's and it's mates. Well if AI can't use them dynamicaly, then it's okay... but for MP this is severe flaw.

I don't know. Campaign might have been the one which caused bad scores... or then game simply sucked. There's no demo so only thing i can do is to wait for it... Who knows? Maybe ArmA truly is pile of poo (you said it ofpforum, not me! )

I'm just clad that i don't see ArmA-hype anywhere. Man! I just hate hype. Pelit magazine had taste of the game, and writer admitted that he will buy it when it is available. That's enough ArmA-hype for me.

? (i didn't get this)

ArmA is basicaly like all other FPSs, but ArmA bases on empty pre-made island(s) with forests, towns etc... So there is no life (well somesort of wildlife maybe). Life is created by editing missions (soldiers, civilians, vehicles etc...). So there isn't life on regular basis, every "living"-thing is added by missiondesigner. How large is one mission... it is up tp mission designer (who can do miracles with OFP/ArmA) 15 minutes or 15 hours or days in realtime. In OFP there are few very long missions which could be classified as RPG. I had that same impression from OFP too... Until i opened missioneditor first time. I played whole campaign thinking that there is jack-the-civilian driving his tractor on the fields all the time. Or civilian in that green car drives to his work at 8.00 and then back to his home at 16.00 every day

Pelit magazine has been following ArmA... I can't wait that they get their hands on it tilt.tv sucks

Well i think that shellshock (If you mean that when big cannon is fired it produces big BOOM! and not meaning dust kicked from ground) isn't even that minor feature... Losing ability to hear for rest of life. That would be nice feature... "OMG! That friendly tank is coming near us! Let's hope that it doesn't fire its cannon... or even .50 cal/12.7 mm machinegun." HEH-HEH combined arms just had a new ugly side. But most likely that will be left out from ArmA. Or then every soldier should be equiped with ear-plugs...

As if firing weapons from the hip would be a unique, secret and US-only approach ? Firing from the hip is hollywood-crap but no serious tactics. If you ever tried firing an assault rifle from the hip you´d know how inefficient that method of bullet-waste is. I guarantee you that you don´t hit smack with your rifle fired from the hip. It is to scare the enemy. IT has anything to do with killing the enemy. We were thought that if you spot an enemy and he spots you. Shoot one shot and dive for cover. In battlefield people are in tenssion, if someonne shoots at you, your (or yours nerves, muscles, insticts) most likely react to it that. people waste thousands of bullets to get one kill even in WW2, not to mentions modern assaultrifle's era. Why all those men who can shoot accurately during training can't shoot in battlefield? Does it have anything to do with the fact that enemy shoots back, and men are affraid of that and so they just spray bullets without even aiming. THIS IS TO ALL THOSE WHO DOESN'T SEEM TO GET THE FACT THAT It is stupid to run full speed if you see that enemy kill it first then run! In OFP i rarely shoot when running, as it doesn't have suppressive value, but i've saved my "life" sometimes with it expacely in build-in areas in less than 10 meters distance. About charge, how many of you have tried to shoot aimed shots at enemy or opponent who sprints close to you. mostly this shooting is very unaccurate because aiming takes time if your suprised. My personal experience is that pistols are best for this situations as it's small and easy to use, during my airsoft hobby i had French Fa-Mas replica, but even that it was short and compact it was hard to gain an aim to fast moving target. Expacly when i was still un-experienced. Charging side has it's advantages, i can't list them, but from airsoft i seen that facts are undeniable. But as stated earlier, mostly it is better to move slower and be more prepared to shoot aimed shots fastly than move fast and hamper down ability to shoot fastly and accurately. Situation shows which method is best. I know something about airsoft, but i don't say that i know something about battlefield as i haven't been in it myself... only read about it a lot.

I think PainDealer was referring to William Porter's Blog not game... If you ment Paindealer... And if i understood right that you were talking about updating the game? As subject was about (non-)updating that blog.

OK. As i said it impossible to discuss things like this in forums (atleast with my english): I was after this same thing. I wrote about it to my previour post, but then deleted it. That shooting when sprinting-thing is to suppress enemy, it meaning isn't to hit the enemy, but to scare the enemy and so gain a upper hand. If villain exposes himself then ofcourse charging man has to shoot him as fast and effectively as possible or be very likely dead. Yep OFP's running animation is good for charging. to JobJenkins222: If you ment me with that freedom taken away-thing. I didn't say that shooting in run should be forbidden, i just ment these animation models where gun points to my left when i run... and that is direction where some of my team-mates are. Now. I have autofire selected and "accidentaly" press "fire"-key... I've killed some AIs with that.

I don't know, but I seriously probably won't be buying this game if it doesn't have Ninjas. That is right! If i can't have one ninja and atleast two Laws in my backback i won't buy this game.... Ok now there is smiley so that nobody takes this comment too seriously.

I can't help it but i have to comment back to XCess I'm speaking of bad, very bad situations. But it is impossible to discuss about situations and procedure in text mode. I know from my own experience from airsoft and militaryexercises that charging opponent isn't easy to deal with. It is already close to you and it very much likely knows your location, when conditions that i mentioned earlier are met. But charging should be used only when speed has to be maximum as charging has it's severe risks. 30 meters isn't long distance so formation shouldn't break too much. I do hope that i can run my weapon pointing forward in ArmA... No more friendly fire, when i accidentaly press my mouse button.

Yes! This is general way of advancing, but as i said, sometimes things can get so bad that it's better to run all the way to end and try to keep enemy's heads down with agressive fire. These situations are dire: your surrounded and/or enemy is fleeing or enemy ambushes your troops in close range. Charge has to be less than 30 meters. That is what my soldier's manual says about it. And from history i've learned that men with automatic weapons can perform effective charge if it happens in that 30 meters range. Enemy has very less time to react, even less if their ears are ringing from handgrenades' blasts. But it can turn out very ugly. I've understood that AI in ArmA can fire suppressive fire, but i haven't heard anything about what are its effects, does it just allow AI to shoot lots of bullets in certain area. If i remeber right OFP had suppressive fire effect too (arms moved little bit and so aiming had to be adjusted again), but bullet had to hit very close, maybe less than 10 centimeters. In OFP fights are too clean and fast. Only way to long them alot is high dispression for bullets and i don't like it (Well JAM made them pretty allright). I'd like more blur, hand's shaking, head's shaking if bullets fly near... i dunno maybe less than a 1-2 meter. But well this goes to OFF-topic again

How can one carry multiple of them then? I wont buy this game i can carry only one LAW!!! It would suck. EDIT: OK and i put smiley here too. Man! people is so blind if there isn't smiley in text... they can't find humor from it... or then it's just my bad english.

Quenaelin got it guite right. Running and shooting is militarytactic, and it has it uses still in these days. It's not very likely: sometimes in situations where something has been badly f**ked-up already. If you are in position that you need more speed than accurate fire, like your surrounded and you need to get out of there fast and it means that you have to charge towards enemy near you. Shooting has more effect in morale of you and enemy than in killing enemy, but ArmA won't present suppression. I'm thinking something like in Red Orchesta where screen get blurry and shaky if rounds come close, atleast this is what i've heard of it. Sound great idea to simulate fear of death, sometimes this could be disabled from someone (AIs and/or players) randomly to simulate those rare cold-blooded killers. Skill-level ofcourse should also affect to this. Running animation like it was in original OFP was good, some mods' animations seems to forget the point that gun should be better pointing forward and NOT your team-mate's foot. I don't even wanna think about yelling and punishment if this would have happened during combatshooting.

This is nice... campaign lasted 20 minutes, but it was good, difficulty wasn't not stupidly increased (our platoon versus enemy company in dug-in positions). In third mission i didn't get any enemy killed or even wounded . Missions seems to hold bugs, like in first mission i caught multiple speeches about APC coming towards us, but nothing bad.

It's nice to see that people are exited from this info, i'm too you-know! Being tough "box guy", but still i just have to...

Lots fuzz from one word "crack"... It would be nice to have that, but i'd would be much more happy to have properly modeled wire-guided AT-missiles like TOW, OFP don't have any addon or mod where wire-guided missile flies like it should (Is this flaw in OFP engine?), it's almost impossible to hit moving target because of lazy missile guiding. Old and unrealistic whistle or new and realistic "crack" doesn't matter to me, as long as i know that it was close, experience let's me know if it was 2 meters away or 5 cm away from my head.

maxqubit Got it right! We all were green with OFP... Years of playing/modding has rised OFP to what it is! Best FPS ever created. Hard-core guys can set their own servers with others like them (those who see red, when word newbie/arcade is mentioned) they can design missions fast after release as missioneditor is same as in OFP, while newbies need time and motivation to get know ArmA. Hard-core guys can make it in middle of newbies as they know each-of-others and they have already groups formed, but newbies can't make it in middle of Hard-core guys, if they aren't given a change by BIS. What makes OFP unrealistic? Missions, even if weaponspecs and all other are tweaked as realistic as possible, but unrealism in mission destroys everything else. For OFP there is lots of missions which are designed to be fun and hard shoot'em up, and those can get good points from players (there are lots of arcade guys inside OFP community... WATCH YOU BACK! ). I've played realistic mission with Deltaforce (the game before millenium), Medal of Humor-series etc... Their engine isn't desiged to "simulate" realism, but still some missions holds key elements which makes it feel "real", same goes with OFP. And mission is only thing that keeps game in some level of realism, was the game designed to be shoot'em up or simulator...

I drag FDF to this as example of good recoil model simulation: OFP don't support sideways (x-axis) movement in recoil, only weapon sway moves weapon in x-axis. So how aiming was made harder/realistic in FDF? First weapon rised up, when it was fired, and after that it started to drop down, but it droped lower than shooter's target or aiming point was (so shooter was aiming below the target temporarily). Then weapon started to rise up to it's final aiming point: So there is possibility to shoot rabidly to target. But as weapon is still in motion, it is unaccrate. To get accurate shot, player had to wait for weapon to rise back to it's final position and it took time. In original OFP I can shoot to 300 meter in rate of 2 shots in 1 second, but in FDF it takes 1 second to recover from recoil + weapon sway (which is increased) can affect to hitting target pretty drasticaly in that time, expacely if target is lying down. So player might have to fix his aiming. Sideway movement in recoil isn't necessary from my point of view. But forexample in FDF, M16 had much harder recoil than in RL to cover it's sideway movement (I'm quessing! I'm not from FDF dev team after all and i haven't shot with M16).

Dslyecxi said: the important stuff is what has already been mentioned. So this must mean that off-topic is way to go from now-on here it comes: We were told that man should shoot both eyes open with iron sights, but i couldn't do it as most of us couldn't. I've trained it long time, but double picture is just too confusing (i can choose my dominant eye by my will, but the other just keeps interfering). I prefer one eye method which strains open eye, but i get one "un-tranparrent" sight. Olympic shooter seems to use cover in front of their other eye, so both eye open method has to have it's lacks even to pro-shooter. Or then it is just about genes.